Slashdot Mirror
Engineers Design Safer SUV
vex24 writes "Engineers from the Union of Concerned Scientists have unveiled blueprints for a "safer, more fuel efficient" SUV using "off-the-shelf technology". Looks like good stuff if the big automakers decide to pay attention."
It's called a Minivan.
The lions share of SUVs are being sold, not to Off Road, not to climb every mountain, but to hold Mother and Child as they go to the market.
This may get some traction for people who actually use 4x4's to go offroad, or the people that need the trendiest of the trendy, but the very aspect of Fuel Efficiency pretty much gaurantees it's lighter, which means it's not going to be as sturdy in an accident, and thus, won't sell to the soccer mom market.
Safer to everyone else on the road, yes. Not the inhabitants however.
"Inattention makes clowns of us all" -Bean
I do agree to an extent that some SUV's are gas guzzlers... I've never actually spec'd one (I don't like them for other reasons...) but I would guess some of the lower v6 models actually get resonable gas milage...
I own a Camaro with a 350 under the hood. And while the city milage isn't the best (I average 18-20), the highway milage rocks (30mpg). And why this is relevant? Well, I feel that they could make SUV's that are gas sippers. Just like I could have bought a V6 Camaro.
So we have 2 problems. First, the automakers don't see a problem with building gas guzzlers and placing them in a "truck" category. Secondly,
*repeat after me*
People want them.
No matter what happens, until you hit someone's pocketbook hard, you will not change their spending habits. Even as gas prices have gone up, I'm sure people (myself included) have complained about prices. Still doesn't stop the twice a month fillup (maybe more for others...) And it doesn't stop the sales either. It will take a big hit to make some people realize that it may not be worth it.......
Karnal
That's really the key paragraph.
Folks, it's easy to snipe at something you know nothing about. Thing is, it's one thing to design something on paper. It's quite another to have something that can actually be built and pass the stringent safety standards of both the US and Europe.
That "efficient engine" may fail to meet acceleration guidelines, or noise guidelines, or emissions guidelines, or who knows what else. And no matter what, since a full car cycle from initial idea through design through testing to actual models in the showroom can easily be five years (and maybe more), this "blueprint" isn't really competing with the cars of today, but the cars of five(+) years from now. In fact, I would not be at all surprised that the cars entering the design phase now in the real automakers are superior to this group of "Concerned Scientists" in every significant way.
There's no conspiracy in the auto industry; they are just selling the cars people want that meet government standards, and a whole lot of other concerns to. (A car is less complicated in most ways then the largest computer programs but they are still not trivial and require a lot more components to be working at ~95%+ of theoretical efficiency to function properly; cars have long since diminishing returns whereas software developers routinely accelerate their routines by factors of 100 or more with an hour's work.)
It's easy to design a car that doesn't have to be driven and score rhetorical points. It's even easier to be a bystander that knows nothing about car design and assume that this new design is being "suppressed". Making cars that meet all of the requirements of the government AND the market AND making a profit, now that's hard.
Never wear a seat belt while driving on a frozen lake.
Yeah, and the other 99.9999% of the time, it's a good idea to wear your seatbelt. I hate when people come up with these oddball scenarios to justify their bad habits to themselves. If you don't feel like wearing a seat belt, just say it! Remove yourself from the gene pool and do us all a favor...
I've got it, here's how we'll build a safer SUV. Go get a pencil, I'll wait.
We start with a ordinary huge ass gas guzzling urban assault vehicle. Lower it way down to the ground, put smaller tires on it, cut off the huge cow-catcher bumpers so it won't mangle the Pinto you just ran over, shrink the frame so it'll fit in a parking spot and save weight, and put in a smaller engine. Perfect!
I call it a "car".
--riney
How exactly would the oil and gas industry fight this? Oil and gas industries don't make cars. Ford makes cars, not Exxon. If Ford could snap its fingers and make a car that ran off of happy thoughts they wouldn't think twice and the entire world (except for New York City) would have cars where alls you have to do is think a happy thought and it goes from 0 to 60 in 3 seconds. Oil industry be damned, Ford wouldn't think twice.
Ford likes making money. There is a lot of money in making cars that have low gas mileage. They might not give a damn about the environment any more then the government makes them, but they DO give a damn about selling cars. If you can have the same car that pollutes less, eats less gas, and the cost is the same it is going to sell better, pure and simple. They want to sell cars, the gas mileage and safety of the cars helps in selling the cars.
Certainly though, mileage isn't the only thing be consider, and this is the reason why eco friendly cars are a hard sell, not due to any great evil by baby eating oil companies. Hybrid cars for example have mind blowing gas mileage and the price on them is not too far out of whack. They do not sell not because of an evil oil conspiracy, but because people don't want a tiny car with poor acceleration. Hell, I wouldn't want one of those things. The extra dollars in saved gas is not going to do me any good if a SUV (improved version or otherwise) runs me down in a car accident and my little plastic car is squished flat. I also like to run 70 to 90 miles per hour on the interstate. At high speeds the hybrid cars fall flat on their face.
Don't like corporations? Great. They certainly are not always a basket of roses. However, there is a point where you draw the line. It doesn't rain on your day off because an evil corporation was looking to make your frown. Cars are less then eco friendly not because the oil industries have made a secret pact of pure evil with the auto industry, but because the auto industry just doesn't yet have a technology that is both eco friendly AND something consumers are willing to buy.
All the auto industries are in it against each other. They all want your buck. In a sense, you are right, they fairly amoral about who they screw to get it. In this case though, the auto industry is working for your cause. If they thought they could make more money by completely screwing over the oil industry and making a car that doesn't run on fossil fuels, they would do and not give a thought to what industries they were destroying. If you would buy it, they would make it, oil industry be damned.
Those of us that use SUVs for the 'U' part would prefer that you don't make them useless, thank you. When you can't afford to have multiple vehicles, it's nice to have a vehicle that you can fit either several sheets of plywood or four passengers in. You can't do that with a pickup (4 door extended cab with a 3' bed isn't a truck) or sedan, and you can't drive a mini-van at a job site (that's off-road, folks).
Instead of phyhsically transforming SUVs into pure status symbols (instead of them just being such in practice), why not teach people how to drive them safely? Your vehicle weighs more than 4000 lbs? You should need special training and a special license. Your bumper more than 18" off the ground? Yet other special training and licensing. I'm sure states would love to collect the additional fees, and the need for the training will reduce the number of vehicles on the road while increasing (at least slightly) the safety of the ones that are out there. Best of all, those of us that do actual work with our SUVs won't be stuck in a world where an SUV is a station wagon with big tires.
We live in the country off 2 miles of dirt road that tends to turn impassible in poor weather. A 4WD with high ground clearance is essential if we need to get to/from our home. Add to this that we often carry my brothers kids with us (his 3 plus our 3) means we need to seat 8 people for an average of 3-4 days / week.
If my wife wants to do any grocery shopping while she is in town then nothing short of a suburban will do. The alterantive of making multiple trips is simply silly and would use more fuel anyway.
If anyone can build a vehicle that meets my needs without the disadvantages I will buy it - till then I wish people would think before they dismiss SUVs out of hand.
KK4SFV
SUVs [...] are the safest vehicles on the road when judged by the only statistic that matters: occupant fatality rate.
This is exactly the mentality that angers me most about SUV drivers. The only statistic that matters is how likely are they to die. The poor stopping distance, poor handling, higher center of gravity, and larger blindspots on the sides of SUVs add up to a less stable vehicle that is more likely to get into accidents with other vehicles. Worse, their excess weight, high bumpers, and battering-ram ladder frame design makes them more likely to injure other drivers.
Safety is not a one-way street. Driving on the highway should not have to be an arms race.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
I'm always amused when I see a comment like this on
People are not idiots. Mileage is conspicuously displayed on the spec. sheet of the car. I fill up my SUV about once a week, a lot more if we go on long trips (and in MN everything is far away). It gets about 30% less mileage than my last car. Don't care. I can afford the gas: it's just a part of paying for what I want.
Oh, and just for the record: I went to high school in NYC, so I didn't get driver's ed. Like many New Yorkers, I never even drove a car until I was in my 20's and then I paid a driving school to teach me. Try learning to drive in NYC rush hour traffic -- ingrains those survival skills pretty deep